Feb 03, 2026 Planning Commission

[Call to Order]

[00:00:06]

>> WELCOME TO THE FEBRUARY 3, 2026 CLAY COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING.

PLEASE PUT YOUR CELL PHONES ON SILENCE OR VIBRATE. YOU FEED TO TAKE -- IF YOU NEED TO TAKE CALL PLEASE STEP OUTSIDE. PLEASE RISE AND JOIN ME IN THE PLEDGE.

I'M THE CHAIRMAN OF THE CLAY COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION. MINUTES WILL BE TAKING BY CHRISTINE BLANCHETT. THANK YOU. OTHER STAFF PRESENT.

WE HAVE THE DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND ZONING. WE HAVE DODIE SELIG, CHIEF PLANNER. WE HAVE CALEB FROM REAL ESTATE. ASSISTANT COUNTY ATTORNEY AND WALKING IN THE BACK IS KELLY HENDRY. WHO IS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.

IS CHAD HERE? OKAY, WE ALSO HAVE CHAD JOSI. WE THANK DEPUTY'S BUTLER AND EKK FROM CLAY COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT TO HELP PROVIDE SECURITY.

THE CLAY COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION ASSISTANT ADVISORY TO THE CLAY COUNTY BOARD COUNTY OF COMMISSIONERS OR BCC. ALL LISTENING COMMISSIONERS ARE VOLUNTEERS, APPOINTED BY THE BOARD COUNTY COMMISSIONERS. WE SERVE TWO YEAR TERMS. THE COMMISSION'S DUTIES ARE OUTLINED IN SECTION 163.3174 OF THE FLORIDA STATUTES. MOST OF THE DECISIONS MADE BY THE PLANNING DECISION IS RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE BCC. THE BCC WILL BE FINAL SAY ONE WEEK FROM TODAY OR FOURTH TUESDAY THREE WEEKS FROM TODAY. THE BCC MEETING STARTS AT 4:00.

ZONING AND LAND USE MATTERS START AT 5:00. PLEASE CHECK THE BCC AGENDA ON THE CLAY COUNTY WEBSITE. IF THERE'S AN ITEM ON THE AGENDA YOU WISH TO SPEAK ABOUT OR TALK ABOUT DURING THE OPEN COMMENT PERIOD, PLEASE FILL OUT ONE OF THE COMMENT CARDS.

GIVE IT TO MS. BLANCHETT. THERE'S A THREE MINUTE TIME LIMIT.

[1. Approval of Minutes]

COMMISSION. DO I HEAR A MOTION? >> SO MOVED?

>> SECOND. >> ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS A PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD. AT THIS TIME, ANY MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC CAN MAKE COMMENTS OR ANY ITEM INCLUDED ON TONIGHT -- NOT INCLUDED ON THE AGENDA BUT PERTINENT TO THE BUSINESS PLANNING COMMISSION. I DON'T HAVE ANY CARDS FOR THAT. ANYBODY WANT TO MAKE ANY COMMENTS IN GENERAL? I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD AND SEEING NONE.

I WILL CLOSE IT. WE WELCOME THE PUBLIC TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETINGS AS

[1. Public Hearing to consider PUD 25-0009. (District 5, Burke) (J. Bryla)]

YOUR PRESENCE HERE IS IMPORTANT AND APPRECIATED. THE PROCESS WILL BE EACH ITEM ON THE PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA WILL BE PRESENTED BY THE MEMBER OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT. AS PART OF THE PRESENTATION, STAFF WILL INDICATE WHETHER THEY RECOMMEND APPROVAL, OR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE CHANGE. NEXT APPLICANT WILL BE SPEAKING.

FOLLOWING THE APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION, I WILL OPEN THE FLOOR FOR MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC TO OFFER THEIR VIEWS. YOUR TIME IS FOR STATING YOUR VIEWS.

NOT ASKING QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT, MEMBERS OF THE STAFF OR THE COMMISSIONERS.

THE COMMENTS IS DIRECTED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION. IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK, YOU WILL FLNEED TO TAKE THE OATH. IF YOU AREN'T SURE, GO AHEAD ATAKE THE OATH.

AFTER STAFF AND THE APPLICANT AND THE PUBLIC HAVE HAD ALL THEIR CHANCE TO STATE THEIR VIEWS THE FLOOR WILL BE CLOSED FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS AND THE APPLICANT WILL HAVE THE

[00:05:04]

SPEAK PLEASE STAND. I ONLY HAVE TWO >> PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND.

DO YOU AFFIRM THAT THE TESTIMONY YOU ABOUT TO GIVE IS THE WHOLE TRUTH AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH

SO HELP YOU GOD. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. FIRST ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS PUD 25009. MS. CARSON WILL TELL US A SHE KNOWS ABOUT IT.

>> THIS ITEM WILL BE GOING BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS FEBRUARY 24TH AT THEIR MEETING. THE APPLICANT FOR THIS APPLICATION IS SEAN DEEP SING AND AGENT IS KELLY HARTWIG. THE LOCATION OF THE PROPERTY IS 3075 HIGHWAY 17 WHICH IS U.S. 17 AND COUNTY ROAD 209. THIS IS LOCATED IN THE SPRINGS PLANNING DISTRICT.

THAT IS COMMISSION DISTRICT 5 COMMISSIONER BURKE'S DISTRICT. THE APPLICATION WOULD CHANGE THE ZONING DESIGNATION OF 2.45 ACRES FROM COMMERCIAL RECREATION TO PLANNED COMMERCIAL.

THE MAP ON THE LEFT SHOWS THE NOTIFICATION BUFFER THAT WE SENT NOTICES OUT TO WHICH IS 350 FEET FROM THE PO BOUNDARIES OF THE PROPERTY. THE MAP ON THE LEFT IS LAND USE MAP. THE RED INDICATES THE COMMERCIAL.

LITTLE DIFFICULT TO SEE BUT THIS PROPERTY IS THAT LITTLE TRIANGLE THAT'S RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE.

IT IS CURRENTLY A COMMERCIAL LAND USE. THE MAP ON THE RIGHT IS THE EXISTING ZONING WHICH IS BV5 IN THAT DARK GRAY AREA. THE SUBJECT PARCEL CONTAINS A FORMER CONVENIENT STORE THAT'S BEEN REDEVELOPED INTO A RESTAURANT.

IN 2023, THIS PROPERTY CAME BEFORE YOU FOR A REZONING TO BB5 TO ALLOW THE RESTAURANT TO SELL ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES. ON THE MAP IS THE PROPOSED ZONING.

IT WOULD GO TO PCD. THE SITE PLAN IS LOCATED ON THE RIGHT.

I ORIENTED IT SO IT MATCHES THE LOCATION MAP THAT YOU GOT THERE. THE APPLICANT'S PROPOSING THAT THE SITE WILL CONTAIN THREE OTHER BUILDINGS THAT WOULD BE COMMERCIAL, OFFICE BUILDINGS AS WELL AS DRIVE-THRU COFFEE RESTAURANT. THEY'RE NOT SURE OF THE USES.

THAT IS WHAT THEY ARE PROPOSING. THE RESTAURANT WOULD STAY IN THE CURRENT LOCATION.

THEY ARE SHOWING ALSO RETENTION IN THE BACK CORNER OFF 209. THE PCD IS INTENDED TO ENCOURAGE DEVELOPMENT OF LAND AS PLANNED COMMUNITIES ENCOURAGE FLEXIBLE AND CREATIVE CONCEPTS OF SITE PLANNING ACCOMPLISHED MORE DESIRABLE DEVELOPMENT OYOU COULD UNDERSTAND ZONING AND TO PROVIDE A STABLE ENVIRONMENT THAT'S COMPATIBLE WITH THE ADJACENT LAND USE.

IT SURROUNDED BY RESIDENTIAL TO THE BACK. IT'S GOT COMMERCIAL ON BOTH SIDES. THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSNG FOLLOWING PERMIT USES.

USES ARE TO INCLUDE ALL PERMITTED USES IN BB1. BB2, BB2 AND BB5.

THE ADDITIONAL USE OF OUTSIDE STORAGE. THE HEIGHT WOULD BE LIMITED TO 35 FEET. THE MAXIMUM LOT COVERAGE WILL BE 75%.

THEY ARE PROPOSING A FLOOR AREA RATIO OF 40% WHICH IS CONSISTENT WITH THESE TYPE OF COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS. THE BB CONDITIONAL USES LISTED THAT WOULD BE PROHIBITED ARE ADULT ENTERTAINMENT AND SEXUALLY ORIENTED BUSINESSES OR OBNOXIOUS USES.

THIS BRINGS CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE VOTED 6-0 TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THIS PROJECT.

HOWEVER, BASED ON THE CRITERIA IN THE REPORT AND NARRATIVE PROVIDED BY THE APPLICANT, STAFF DOES NOT SEE WHERE THE APPLICANT MET THE CRITERIA ESTABLISHED FOR A PLANNED COMMERCIAL DISTRICT.

THEREFORE, RECOMMENDS DENIAL OF PUD 2 250009. ANY QUESTIONS?

>> QUESTIONS FROM THE STAFF.

I SAW THIS ONE. YOU HAVE 75% COVERAGE AND THEN YOU GOT A 40%, WHAT'S THE

[00:10:06]

DIFFERENCE? >> COVERAGE IS JUST WOULD BE THE FIRST FLOOR.

YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT A BUILDING ON THE PROPERTY. FLOOR AREA RATIO TAKES INTO CONSIDERATION ALL THE FLOORS. YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE TOTAL DEVELOPMENT THAT'S INVOLVED NOT JUST THE FOOTPRINT OF THE BUILDING. 75% WILL BE THE FOOTPRINT FLOOR

AREA RATIO IS THE ENTIRE DEVELOPMENT. >> OKAY.

>> COULD YOU EXPLAIN -- ON PAGE 2 OF THE APPLICATION AND IT'S TALKING ABOUT THE PARKING.

THEY STATED PARKING WILL BE DETERMINED BY THE LAKE ASBURY CODE REQUIREMENTS

>> I THINK THE APPLICANT CAN EXPLAIN THAT ONE. >> OKAY, THANK YOU.

>> I THINK WE DID A ZONING CHANGE FOR THIS PROPERTY NOT LONG AGO.

IT WAS PROBABLY WITHIN THE LAST TWO YEARS. DO YOU REMEMBER?

I CAN'T RECALL WHAT WE CHANGE IT FROM AND TO? >> I DON'T RECALL WHAT IT WAS.

I THINK IT WAS A BB. IT IT WAS A COMMERCIAL DISTRICT. IT HAD CONVENIENCE STORE TURNED INTO THE RESTAURANT. IT WAS CHANGED TO BB5 SO IT ALLOW FOR ALCOHOL SALE.

THAT WASN'T A USE THAT WAS PERMITTED IN THE PRIOR ZONING. >> MY RECOLLECTION MIGHT NOT BE COMPLETELY ACCURATE, WASN'T IT ALSO TO EXPAND THE EXISTING BUILDING THAT WAS THERE TO MAKE

THE RESTAURANT LARGER? >> THEY DID. THEY ADDED AN OUTDOOR DECK AREA.

>> THANK YOU. >> I HAVE A GENERAL QUESTION. THREE BUILDINGS ARE ALONG THE BACK SIDE. IS THERE A OFFICIAL ROOM TO HAVE A BUFFER?

>> THERE IS A ROAD THAT OBVIOUSLY IS ALONG THERE. OUR CODE WOULD REQUIRE THAT THERE BE A BUFFER BETWEEN PARKING AREAS BUT IT'S NOT AS DEFINITIVE ON ROADS LIKE THIS WHEN THERE'S NO PARKING. THAT COULD BE SOMETHING ADDRESSED IN THE PCD.

THAT WOULD BE RESIDENTIAL BEHIND IT. >> YOU MIGHT HAVE ALSO SAID THAT THE -- THIS DRAWING THEY HAVE IS NOT NECESSARILY -- THEY WANT LATITUDE IN ORDER TO -- THIS IS

NOT CONCRETE. IS THAT CORRECT? >> THEY PROVIDED TH THAT AS A CONCEPT PLAN. I THINK THEY CAN ANSWER TO THAT FURTHER.

THEY DON'T KNOW WHAT WILL GO INTO THOSE BUILDINGS. I THINK THAT WOULD BE A QUESTION

THEY CAN ANSWER. >> DO YOU HAVE A QUESTION, STAFF?

APPLICANT? >> I'M KELLY HARTWIG. THE PURPOSE OF THIS IS TWO FOLD.

FDOT -- >> CAN YOU PULL THE MIC UP? >> THANK YOU, SIR.

FDOT IS OBVIOUSLY MODIFYING THE WHOLE 209 ENTRANCE AND DELETING THE CROSSROAD SO THE LIGHT IS GOING AWAY. THEY ARE MAKING US TEAR OUT THE ENTRANCES AND MOVE IT TO ONE.

THERE WILL BE ONLY ONE ENTRANCE OFF 17. WILL BE A RIGHT TURN AND RIGHT TURN OUT. ONE OF THE REASONS WE DID THE CONCEPT PLAN WAS TO SHOW THERE WILL BE ADDITIONAL ENTRANCES. WE HAVE TO ADD ENTRANCE OFF 209 209MAHAMA BLUFF ROAD.

I HAD A CALL TODAY. SHE WAS A LITTLE CONCERNED ABOUT THE WAY I HAD WRITTEN THE USE FOR BB2. ON THE PAPER THAT SHE PASS OUT TO YOU, I CHANGED THE ENTIRE USES TO MAKE IT EVEN MORE RESTRICTED, GET RID OF OUTAGE STORAGE.

THERE WILL BE NO OUTAGE STORAGE. IT WILL BE PROFESSIONAL OFFICES, LIKE A HAIR SALON, BAKERY.

IT'S ON PAGE 2. IT ELIMINATED THAT BULK ACCESS AND LIMITED US TO WHAT WILL BE MORE OR LESS LIKE A SMALL STRIP CENTER. ONE OF THE REASONS WE DO CALL

[00:15:06]

WE HAVE TO MEET COUNTY GUIDELINE. WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR EXCEPTION ON THE PARKING. WE ARE EXPLORING UNDERGROUND RETENTION.

IF WE DO THAT WE'LL BE ABLE MAXIMIZE OUR PARKING TO FIT WHAT WE NEED.

WE ARE LOOKING AT THE THREE BUILDINGS. I DON'T THINK THE BUILDING CONCEPT GOING TO CHANGE. THEY MAY SHIFT A LITTLE BIT TO ALLOW FOR THE PARKING TO BE ACCOMMODATED. IT HAS TO GO THROUGH THE FULL SITE PLAN REVIEW WITH THE COUNTY AND COUNTY ENGINEERS SO IT MEETS ALL THE COUNTY GUIDELINES. THIS IS REALLY JUST ABOUT THE USES. WE DON'T WANT TO SPEND HUNDREDS OF THOUSAND OF DOLLARS TO DO ARCHITECTURAL PLAN. BB5 IS RESTRICTIVE, THE ONE THAT'S CURRENTLY.

ONLY REAL CHANGE HERE, THIS WOULD MAKE IT EVEN MORE RESTRICTIVE AS FAR AS THE USES.

WOULDN'T BE ALLOWED BOAT SALES, MARINE SALES, CAR SALES. ANY OF THAT WILL BE ELIMINATED.

WE WOULDN'T BE IN THOSE USES. THAT WAS THE BIG CHANGE THAT WAS MADE.

AS FAR AS THE LAKE ASBURY. THAT WAS SOMETHING PREVIOUS ZONING PEOPLE HAD ASKED ME TO PUT IN THERE. I CAN CARE LESS WHETHER WE HAVE THE LAKE ASBURY.

WE'RE GOING TO MEET THE COUNTY GUIDELINES FOR PARKING PERIOD. AND WHATEVER RESTAURANT CODES WILL BE. THEY HAVE TO MEET THOSE GUIDELINES.

>> ANY QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT? >> I DO.

SINCE I DIDN'T HAVE TIME TO REVIEW THIS, WHAT DID YOU CHANGE IN THIS TODAY?

>> USAGE. >> THE ONLY CHANGE WAS SECTION 2 USAGE AND RESTRICTIONS? YOU HAVE LIKE ON HERE -- YOU TOOK OUT ALL THE COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY AND ALL THE PAPE BBS AD ALL THAT LANGUAGE. YOU STILL JUST SAY COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY.

THAT'S PRETTY BROAD STATEMENT. >> BELOW IT WHERE IT SAYS RETAIL BUSINESSES.

>> BETH MENTIONED YOU LIKE TO KEEP IT VERY RESTRICTED. I TRIED TO REWRITE IT.

I DIDN'T HAVE A LOT OF TIME. SORRY. I WOULD HAVE GIVEN IT TO YOU

SOONER. >> IF YOU WOULD ANSWER THIS ONE TOO.

IN YOUR DESIGN GUIDELINES, YOU HAVE MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF STRUCTURES PER CITY OF CLAY COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. SHOULDN'T SAY PER CITY. ELSEWHERE, THAT'S WHEN YOU DID YOUR PRESENTATION. YOU HAD 35 FEET. IS THAT BECAUSE THAT'S THE

MAXIMUM WE ALLOW IN THE COUNTY? >> I HAVE TO CHECK ON THAT. I'M SORRY.

>> IT CAN BE LIST AS MAXIMUM ALLOWED IN THE COUNTY. FIRE MARSHAL DICTATES THE USAGE.

>> BETWEEN THE FIRE MARSHAL AND THE BUILDING CODE THEY DETERMINE THE HEIGHT.

I CAN CHECK ON THAT. >> I WILL TELL YOU THE OTHER THING THAT I THINK IS COMPLETELY MISSING FROM THIS WRITE-UP. YOU DID TIE DOWN THE USES QUITE A BIT.

I DON'T SEE ANYTHING IN HERE ABOUT LIGHTING. LIGHTING AND SIGNAGE IS -- IT LOOK LIKE YOU JUST -- LIGHTING IS LIMITED TO OFFENSIVE LIGHT. I CAN TELL YOU THAT NOT EVEN ENFORCEABLE. WE'RE LOOKING FOR SOMETHING MORE LIKE LIGHTING PER CODE, SOMETHING ALONG THOSE LINES WHERE IT'S SPECIFIED. THE OTHER ONE IS IN THE SIGNAGE.

[00:20:02]

>> IT DOES SAY THE SIGNAGE WILL BE ACCORDING TO THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS PUPPETRY

.-- >> I WOULD L LIKE TO SEE SOMETHG MORE SPECIFIC SIDES OF THE SIGN.

WE'RE TRYING TO MOVE FORWARD IN THIS COUNTY AND GET AWAY FROM THE BILLBOARD STORE SIGNS KIND OF THING. WE'LL SEE WHAT OTHER PEOPLE HAVE TO SAY ON THIS.

SOME OF THIS TO ME HONESTLY SEEMS LIKE IT WAS KIND OF CUT AND PASTE ABOUT THE LANDSCAPING BUFFERS. TO YOUR POINT, I THINK, JOE, YOU ASKED ABOUT THE RESIDENT.

THIS GOT HIGHWAY ROADS AROUND IT. I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY BUFFERING REQUIREMENTS THAT I KNOW OF. IF YOU GOT RIGHT-OF-WAYS ALL THE WAY AROUND THE PROPERTY. YES, THERE'S PEOPLE ON THE MAHAMA BLUFF ROAD.

THERE'S RESIDENTIAL. OKAY. WE'LL SEE WHAT EVERYONE HAS TO SAY. THOSE WERE JUST SOME QUESTIONS I HAD.

THANK YOU. >> THERE IS A BUFFER PROPOSED. IT'S DESCRIBED IN HERE.

THERE'S A BUFFER PROPOSED. >> I DON'T THINK IT'S REQUIRED. >> IT'S NOT REQUIRED.

>> QUESTIONS? YOU HAD MENTIONED ABOUT NOT HAVING OUTSIDE STORAGE.

YOU HAVE OUTSIDE STORAGE LIMITED TO RETAIL DISPLAYS. CAN YOU EXPLAIN THAT?

>> TYPICALLY WHAT HAPPENS IS THIS ALLOWS RETAIL STORE TO MOVE THEIR STUFF OUT ON THE FRONT SIDEWALKS. DISPLAY IT AND MOVE IT BACK IN AT NIGHT.

THEY'RE NOT ALLOWED TO DO IT OVERNIGHT. >> OKAY.

>> THANK YOU, SIR. I DON'T HAVE ANY CARDS FOR THIS. ANYBODY FROM THE AUDIENCE WISH TO SPEAK ON THIS AGENDA ITEM? I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. I DON'T SEE ANYBODY STEPPING UP.

CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. BRING IT BACK TO COMMISSION FOR DISCUSSION.

>> OKAY. I WILL CONTINUE IF YOU DON'T MIND.

I DID HAVE A LOT THAT I WANTED TO SAY ABOUT THIS ONE. THIS UPDATED WRITTEN DESCRIPTION TOOK CARE OF SOME OF IT. I DON'T LIKE SOME THINGS IN THIS WRITTEN DESCRIPTION.

FOR EXAMPLE, THE SECOND PARAGRAPH WHERE IT SAYS, THE OWNER WILL BE RESTRICTED IN THE TYPES OF BUSINESSES ALLOWED. WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? HONESTLY, WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? THE WHOLE IDEA BEHIND THE PCD IS TO SO THAT EVERYBODY KNOWS WHAT'S GOING ON THIS PROPERTY.

WHAT DOES THAT MEAN WHEN YOU HAVE A STATEMENT LIKE THAT? WE TALKED ABOUT THE OUTSIDE DISPLAYS. I DON'T UNDERSTAND THIS ONE EITHER.

SEVENTH PARAGRAPH. CREATION OF A MASTER PLAN DEVELOPMENT AFFORDS AND EFFICIENT USE OF LAND WITH EACH EXPANSION OF THE SITE WILL REQUIRE A SUBMITTAL OF INDIVIDUAL SITE PLAN FOR COUNTY APPROVAL. IF THIS IS A PCD, THAT MEANS

YOU'RE COMING BACK HERE. IS THAT NOT RIGHT, BETH? >> IF THEY WERE DOING A PHASE PLAN, IF THEY WERE BRINGING EACH BUILDING IN SEPARATELY, THEY WILL COME TO THE DRC MEETING.

IF THEY WERE TO MAKE A CHANGE FROM THIS VERY CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN TO SOMETHING DRASTICALLY

DIFFERENT, THEN THEY WOULD COME BACK BEFORE YOU. >> OKAY.

I, TOO, HAVE A CONCERN ABOUT THE PARKING. THERE WAS A COMMENT I THINK IN THE STAFF REPORT ABOUT THE PARKING. WHERE WE HAD OVERLAP USES LIKE RESTAURANTS AGAINST OFFICES THAT KIND OF THING. THE WAY THIS IS WRITTEN, THERE'S NO LIMIT ON THAT. IT SAYS RESTAURANTS. YOU CAN GO IN HERE AND PUT ALL RESTAURANTS ON THIS PROPERTY THE WAY THIS IS WRITTEN. NOW YOU DON'T HAVE ENOUGH PARKING. OR YOU CAN PUT ALL DOCTOR OFFICES OR BUSINESSES ON HERE.

NOW YOU DON'T HAVE ENOUGH PARKING. THIS IS NOT SPELLED OUT VERY WELL. THERE'S NOTHING ABOUT LIGHTING IN HERE.

[00:25:04]

THERE'S NO GOOD DEFINITION OF THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT IN HERE. I THINK THERE SHOULD BE BETTER DESCRIPTION OF KIND O SIGNAGE YOU'RE GOING TO USE. I DON'T EVER REMEMBER US DOING A PCD WITH A CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN BEFORE. I DON'T REMEMBER ONE.

I THINK THE JUSTIFICATION FOR IT BEING A PCD IS A LITTLE BIT THIN.

IT'S NOT REALLY -- I DON'T THINK A GOOD REASON FOR BEING A PCD. THOSE ARE KIND OF THE THINGS I HAD WHEN I LOOKED THROUGH THE WRITTEN DESCRIPTION. I WANTED TO SAY, TOO, I PUT A LOT OF STOCK INTO WHAT THE CACS HAVE TO SAY. I THINK THIS IS WHERE WE RUN INTO THE ISSUE OF CONCEPTUALLY, THIS SOUNDS REALLY GOOD. GOOD PLAN.

GOOD IDEA. VERY POORLY EXECUTED. WHICH IS WHERE OUR PLANNING STAFF LOOKS AT IT AND SAYS, THIS IS NOT A WELL EXECUTED PLAN. I WILL TELL YOU I DON'T THINK IT'S WELL EXECUTED EITHER TO THE APPLICANT. I WOULD SUGGEST THAT YOU GO BACK AND REALLY RELOOK AT THIS AND NAIL THIS DOWN. FOR THE PCD, IT SUPPOSED TO BE BETTER THAN WHAT YOU CAN GET UNDER A STRAIGHT ZONING. I DON'T THINK THIS DOES WHICH TYPICALLY MEANS MUCH BETTER DESCRIPTIONS AND REALLY LOCK DOWN, FOR EXAMPLE, I MENTIONED TYPICALLY WE DON'T REQUIRE A BUFFER. MAYBE A BUFFER IS A GOOD IDEA.

LANDSCAPING IS A GOOD IDEA. BETTER LIGHTING PLAN THAN JUST WHAT WE ALLOW.

THE WHOLE IDEA OF A PCD IS THIS SHOULD BE BETTER THAN WHAT ELSE I DON'T THINK THIS DOES IT.

I'M NOT GOING TO SUPPORT THIS. I'M GOING TO SUPPORT THE STAFF ON THIS ONE AND VOTE TO DENY IT BASED ON ALL OF THOSE REASONS. I PROBABLY HAVE SOME MORE NOTES. I HAD A WHOLE BUNCH MORE.

I THINK SOME OF THE USES WENT AWAY THAT CONCERN ME ABOUT THAT. I DID WANT TO POINT THIS OUT.

EVEN THOUGH THE APPLICANT CHANGED IT. ORIGINALLY, THEY HAD LISTED THAT THE USES WOULD BE ANYTHING IN BB, BB1, BB2 AND BB5. I LOOKED ALL THOSE UP.

WHAT YOU HAVE TO UNDERSTAND IN OUR CODE, FOR EXAMPLE, UNDER BB, WHICH WE DON'T EVEN ALLOW ANYMORE. YOU CAN'T GET BB ANYMORE. USES PERMITTED INCLUDE SECTION 26 WHICH IS BB1. IN BB1, IT INCLUDES WHAT ALREADY IN BA.

BB2 WHAT'S IN BA. YOU END UP -- IT'S NOT JUST THOSE ZONING DISTRICTS ALSO IT WOULD INCLUDE BA. BA1 AND BA2. WHICH EVERYTHING.

THAT'S NOT VERY SPECIFIC. IT'S NOT VERY -- IT'S NOT A GOOD DEFINITION OF WHAT MAKES IT BETTER THAN WHAT'S AROUND IT. LIKE I SAID, I THINK THE SPRING SUPPORTED IT.

I LIKE THE IDEA. I THINK IT'S AN EXCELLENT IDEA FOR THAT SITE.

IT'S NOT WELL EXECUTED. WHEN EVERYBODY IS DONE, I WILL MAKE A MOTION.

>> WITHOUT BELABORING RALPH'S POINT. I THINK IT'S A GOOD IDEA.

IT'S GOOD USE OF THE PROPERTY. BETH, THE STAFF RECOMMENDED DENIAL BECAUSE IT'S NOT SPECIFIC ENOUGH TO FIT UNDER THE PCD UMBRELLA. I'M ASKING TO CONFIRM THAT.

>> THAT IS PART OF IT. IT DOESN'T HAVE ANYTHING EXTRA THAT YOU WOULD EXPECT FOR A PCD.

>> THEN JUST TO ALSO AGREE WITH THE IDEA OF THE LIGHTING AND THE SIGNAGE.

[00:30:02]

I LIKE THE IDEA. I GET THE PIECE OF PROPERTY. I KNOW THE PROPERTY.

IT HAS A LOT OF POTENTIAL. THIS REQUEST IS NOT SPECIFIC ENOUGH TO FIT FOR THIS.

>> WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO ASK, WE JUST GOT THE COMMENTS FROM STAFF.

>> HOLD ON A SECOND. >> I'M DONE. THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY.

>> I WILL ENTERTAIN WHAT YOU HAVE TO SAY. >> WE DID GET SOME OF THIS.

I CHANGED IT AS QUICKLY AS I COULD. IT WAS VERY DIFFICULT IN THE TIME FRAME. WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO ASK TO CONTINUE IT UNTIL NEXT MONTH.

I'LL REWRITE THIS AND GET WITH STAFF AND GET THOSE THINGS YOU ASKED FOR, THE LIGHTING, SIGNAGE, THE LANDSCAPE. I CAN PUT THIS ALL IN HERE WITHOUT A PROBLEM.

WE CAN SCULPT THE CONCEPTUAL MASTER PLAN TO SHOW SOME OF THOSE ITEMS LIKE THE BUFFERS AND THINGS LIKE THAT THAT WOULD BE A LITTLE BIT MORE APPLICABLE TO THIS CASE.

I CAN DEFINE THOSE THINGS. THAT'S WHY I REWROTE THE USES. WE DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM CHANGING THIS. WE HAVE TO KNOW WHAT EVERYBODY LOOKS FOR.

IF YOU CONTINUE I CAN COME BACK IN ANOTHER MONTH. MAKE EVERYBODY HAPPIER.

>> MY FEELING ABOUT THIS WHOLE THING, THIS SUPPOSED -- PLANNED COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT.

PLANNED MEANS FROM THE BEGINNING TO THE END. THERE SHOULDN'T BE ANY QUESTIONS WHAT'S GOING THERE, HOW IT WILL LOOK. LIGHTING, ACCESS, THE WHOLE THING. THIS IS MORE LIKE, WE'LL PLAN THIS ON THE FLY.

THAT DON'T WORK. DO WE WISH TO ENTERTAIN AN EXTENSION?

>> I WOULD BE OKAY WITH THAT. >> I LIKE TO SAY, I DON'T THINK IT'S -- THE CONCEPT IS NOT BAD.

THE EXECUTION IS NOT GOOD. >> THE EXECUTION OF THE APPLICATION?

>> WELL THE APPLICATION. HOW THE PLAN WOULD BE EXECUTED. IT NEEDS TO BE -- STAFF CAN GIVE YOU SOME GUIDANCE ON THIS. I THINK -- THIS IS MY PERSONAL OPINION, WHEN YOU LIST ALL THOSE USES, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE SOME DEFINITION A LITTLE BETTER ON THOSE USES.

THE EXAMPLE I GAVE. YOU DON'T WANT IT ALL TO BE RESTAURANTS BECAUSE THEN YOU CAN'T CO-USE THE PARKING SPACES. YOU DON'T WANT TO BE ALL. YOU HAD BANKING IN HERE.

BANKING IS FINE. MAYBE YOU SHOULD PUT IN THERE SOMETHING LIKE ONLY ONE BANK WOULD BE ALLOWED. THAT KIND OF THING. THESE ARE JUST SOME THOUGHTS THAT YOU CAN TAKE UP WITH STAFF. WITH THAT, MR. CHAIR I WILL MAKE A MOTION.

>> ALL RIGHT. >> I WILL MOVE CONTINUANCE ON THIS ITEM TO OUR NEXT MEETING WHICH SHOULD BE MARCH 3RD. I THINK. WHERE IT CAN BE HEARD.

>> MOTION. WE HAVE A SECOND. >> SECOND.

>> ANY DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. >> AYE.

>> SAME SIGN. THANK YOU. SEE YOU NEXT MONTH.

[2. Public Hearing to consider COMP 25-0015 and ZON 25-0029 (District 5, Comm Burke) (D. Selig)]

NEXT AGENDA ITEM IS 25.0015. MS. SELIG. >> THIS PROJECT IS TWO APPLICATIONS. THERE'S A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT AND A REZONING APPLICATION. FOR THOSE WHO WEREN'T FAMILIAR WITH THE PROCESS, A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT THIS SCALE TO LARGE SCALE. IT HAS TEXT IN IT.

TEXT CHANGES I SHOULD SAY. WILL GO TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ON FEBRUARY 10TH. HOWEVER, THAT'S NOT FOR A DECISION.

THAT MEETING IS WHAT'S CALLED TRANSMITTAL HEARING WHERE THE APPLICATION FOR THE COMP PLAN

[00:35:09]

THEN THE STATE HAS 30 DAYS TO PROVIDE COMMENTS AND THEN IT COMES BACK TO THE COUNTY AND THEN IS SCHEDULED FOR FOLLOW-UP MEETING HEARING FOR ACTUAL DETERMINATION OF APPROVAL OR NOT. I WANTED TO LET EVERYBODY KNOW THAT IT'S COME -- IT'S GOING TO THE BCC ON FEBRUARY 10TH BUT NOT A FINAL DECISION. THE ZONING WILL NOT GO ON FEBRUARY 10TH. IT WILL WAIT UNTIL THE STATE PROVIDES ITS COMMENTS.

MY ESTIMATION WOULD BE PROBABLY ONE OF THE APRIL MEETINGS. I DON'T KNOW IF IT WILL MAKE THE SECOND MARCH MEETING. PROBABLY ONE OF THE APRIL'S. SO YOU ALL KNOW.

THE APPLICANT IS SUSAN FRASER. THE PROPERTY IS EAST SIDE OF HENLEY INTERSECTION WHERE THE FUTURE OF RAVINE PARKWAY IS COMING IN. DISTRICT FIVE.

THE COMP PLAN AMENDMENT INCLUDES TEXT COMPONENT. THERE'S A MIRRORING ZONING CHANGE LIKE LAKE ASBURY INTERCHANGE VILLAGE CENTER DESIGNATION BUT ZONING LEVEL.

THE BEIGE PARCELS ALL THE PROPERTIES THAT RECEIVE THE MAILING LETTER, NOTICE OF MEETING AND SIGNS WERE POSTED ON HENLEY AND AT SOME OF THE RESIDENTIAL ROADS THAT DEAD END AT VERBENA PARKWAY. THE PROPERTY IS ALL IN YELLOW. THAT IS THE PROPOSED LA IVC.

IT'S EAST OF HENLEY ROAD. MOST OF IT IS NORTH OF VERBENA PARKWAY.

CHANGES THAT ARE PROPOSED THERE ARE THREE TEXT CHANGES. ONE IS TO INCREASE THE TOTAL NUMBER OF LA IVC ACRES. THERE ARE TWO AREAS THAT'S LA IVC ONE ON HIGHWAY 16 AND THIS IS THE OTHER ONE. THEY ARE VERY DIFFERENT IN SCOPE.

THIS ONE IS ONLY 18.75 ACRES. THAT ONE 150. THE CHANGES THAT ARE PROPOSED ARE ONLY FOR THIS LA IVC. IT WON'T AFFECT THE OTHER ONE. THE FIRST CHANGE TO INCREASE THE SIZE, THAT'S SPELLED OUT IN TEXT IN FROM 18.75 TO 52 ACRES. THEN, THERE IS A CHANGE TO REDUCE THE MINIMUM REQUIRED ACRES FOR RESIDENTIAL IN THIS LA IVC, REDUCE MAXIMUM REQUIRED FOR RESIDENTIAL. THESE ARE IN A TABLE. THEN AS I SAID, AMENDING BOTH THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND ZONING MAP. THIS TABLE SHOWS THE CHANGES THAT ARE PROPOSED. THE CURRENT TABLE ONLY LISTS THE WORD RESIDENTIAL.

IT DOESN'T DEFINE THE TWO LA IVCS AT 16 VERSUS COUNTY ROAD SEPARATELY.

WE'VE ADDED IN ANOTHER LINE THERE SPECIFIC TO THE HENLEY ROAD ONE.

THEN DROPPED THE PERCENTAGE AS YOU SEE. 10 TO 0 AND FROM 50% TO 30%.

ALSO CLARIFIED THE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL. IT SAYS IN TEXT IN THE ORDINANCE. EXCUSE ME IN THE ELEMENT THAT LIGHT ALLOWED IN LA IVC.

WE'VE ADDED THAT EXPLANATION INTO THE TABLE. IT COULD BE OVERLOOKED WHEN IT'S ONLY IN TEXT AND NOT ON THE TABLE. BUT THAT'S NOT REALLY A CHANGE ESSENTIALLY. IT'S MORE OF A CLARIFICATION. IT'S AN AMENDMENT TO BOTH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND THE ZONING MAP USE PROPOSED LAND USE MAP FOR CLARITY HERE. REALLY JUST TELLS YOU THE AREAS. ON JANUARY 15TH OF THIS YEAR, THE LAKE ASBURY CAC HEARD THIS ITEM. THEY VOTED 7-1 TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHANGE AND 8-0 TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE ZONING CHANGE.

[00:40:04]

>> THE CHAIR OF THE CAC IS HERE TONIGHT. >> CAN YOU GO BACK TO THAT TABLE FOR A SECOND? OTHER THAN DEFINING THEM WITH ADDING THESE COMMENTS STATE ROUTE 16 AND 739, WHICH IS HENLEY. DO WE DIFFERENTIATE BETWEEN THE TWO OF THEM ANYWHERE? REMEMBER, WE TALKED ABOUT THE THESE THE LAST MONTH.

I THINK IT SOMETHING TO DO WITH THE SIZE OF IT. >> IT WAS ABOUT MULTIUNIT

DWELLING. THAT WAS THE ISSUE. >> MY OTHER QUESTION ON THIS TABLE IS MINIMUM MAKERS REQUIRED FOR RESIDENTIAL. WE REDUCE THAT TO ZERO THEY DON'T HAVE BUILDING OR RESIDENTIAL. WHY DO WE HAVE A MAXIMUM IN THERE? DO YOU KNOW WHY THE MAXIMUM IS IN THERE?

>> IT'S TO ENCOURAGE COMMERCIAL OFFICE. THE USES HERE REALLY SHOULD BE SERVING THE MOTORISTS. REALLY THE INTENT OF AN INTERCHANGE VILLAGE CENTER DESIGNATION. THERE WAS RESIDENTIAL INCLUDED SO THERE COULD BE SOME WALK TO

WORK COMPONENT. >> SOMEBODY WOULD PUT IN LIKE HOUSING OVER THE RETAIL THAT

KIND OF THING? >> RIGHT, EXACTLY. I'M SURE MS. FRASER WILL HAVE

PLENTY TO TELL US. >> AT THE BOTTOM OF PAGE ONE ON THE WRITEUP ON FIGURE 2 PARTIAL MAP. THE SIX PARCELS CALLED OUT IN YELLOW, SOUTH OF VERBENA ARE NOT

CHANGING. >> THE PARCEL MAP ON THE LEFT, IT'S CONFUSING.

IT'S NOT THE BUBBLE. IT'S THE SIX YELLOW BOXES THAT ARE CALLOUTS.

THEY POINT TO VERY SMALL PARCELS WITHIN THAT BU BUBBLE AREA. THEY ARE ALL OWN BY AN HOA.

GSI -- GIS PULLS OUT ALL THE PARCELS ALL INVOLVED. THE CALLOUTS ARE CONFUSING, I THINK. THEY ARE JUST REFERENCING PART OF THE OVERALL AREA.

WE'RE REALLY FOCUSED ON THE OUTLIER. >> IT'S EVERYTHING ABOVE VERBENA WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. THAT'S ALL CURRENTLY UNDEVELOPED.

>> IT IS ALL UNDEVELOPED. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE HATCH AREA.

THE BUBBLY AREA. SOUTH OF VERBENA AND ALL THE REST OF THAT AREA NORTH OF IT.

WOULD COMPRISE THAT 52 ACRES. >> THANK YOU. >> MS. FRASER?

>> GOOD EVENING, SUSAN FRASER. SLF CONSULTING IN JACKSONILLE. I'M HERE REPRESENTING THE LANDOWNER FOR TWO PARCELS. THERE ARE MANY PARCELS THAT ARE LISTED.

AS I THINK DODIE INDICATED, THIS ORDINANE IS IS CLARITY CASE CLARIFICATION AND INCREASE IN ACREAGE. IT'S TO FULLY DEFINE WHAT'S ALREADY ON THE LAND USE MAP SOUTH OF VERBENA. IT CAPTURES THOSE PARCELS BUT THEY ARE NOT CHANGING.

ONE OF THOSE PARCELS IS REPRESENTED BY THIS APPLICANT. THE PARCELS TO THE NORTH ARE WHERE YOU'LL SEE THE EXPANSION. SOME OF YOU BEEN HERE AS LONG AS I HAVE.

WHEN THE LAKE ASBURY PLAN WAS ADOPTED, THERE WAS NO CHANGES. IT'S A LINE ON THE MAP AND THERE WERE MANY LINE ON THE MAP FOR A WHILE. ONCE THE ROAD STOPPED MOVING AND D.O.T. SAID WE'RE GOING TO BUILD IT HERE, THEY DID THEIR TRAVEL STUDIES FOR THE TOLL REVENUE AND IDENTIFIED WHERE THE INTERCHANGES WERE. IN THE BEGINNING THE INTERCHANGE

[00:45:05]

THAT IS ABOUT 450 ACRES IN AREA. IT WAS PATTERNED AFTER SOUTH POINT.

PERFORM WE HAD -- BEFORE WE HAD COVID, THAT WAS GOING TO BE CLAY COUNTY'S INVESTMENT IN THE BIG EMPLOYMENT CENTER S GOING TO HAVE THAT FLAVOR NOW. IT'S ABOUT 400 ACRES.

I INTRODUCED THE INTERCHANGE VILLAGE CENTER CATEGORY TO THE COUNTY'S COMP PLAN FOR THE ROAD ON STATE 416. IT'S WRITTEN AS LIKE THE VILLAGE CENTER WALKABILITY, SERVICES FOR THE COMMUNITY. WHEN YOU LOOK AT THAT LANGUAGE, IT SAYS YOU CAN HAVE EVERYTHING YOU CAN HAVE IN A VILLAGE CENTER, IT'S AT AN INTERCHANGE. IT SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO HAVE REGIONAL USES, LARGER SCALE USES. THAT LANGUAGE WAS WRITTEN FOR STATE ROUTE 16. THE D.O.T. WHEN THEY DID THEIR ERROR KNEW MODELING -- REVENUE MODELING, THEY FOUND A LOT OF PEOPLE WANTED TO GO ON THE BELTWAY HENLEY.

THEY ADDED THAT PRETTY LATE IN THE D.O.T. IN 2010, WE DID A PLAN AMENDMENT THAT TOOK WHAT WAS THERE WAS A VILLAGE CENTER IN THE SOUTHEAST CORNER -- IT HAD A QUARTER OF VILLAGE CENTER DOWN IN THE SOUTHEAST CORNER.

THE PLANNED AMENDMENT SAID WE'RE GOING TO TAKE EXACTLY THE QUARTER OF THAT THAT WE OWN.

18.75 ACRES. THAT'S WHERE THAT ACREAGE CAME FROM.

WE WILL MOVE TO THIS INTERCHANGE WHICH DIDN'T EXIST MANY MONTHS AGO.

INTERCHANGE SHOWED UP. WE TOOK THE VILLAGE CENTER AND WE MOVED IT.

IT WORKED INDISTINGUISHABLE IN TERMS OF MIX OF USES THAT DODIE SHOWN YOU.

YOU CAN'T HAVE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL THIS ONE. IT WAS INTENDED TO BE MORE OF A COMMERCIAL DISTRICT. I THINK IT ALL LOOKED GOOD ON PAPER AND THEN THE BELTWAY OPENED AND IT CAME REALLY CLEAR THAT THERE WAS A DEMAND FOR A LOT OF SERVICES.

WE SAY THAT SITE IS CURRENTLY VACANT, THE SITE PLAN YOU SEE IS APPROVED WILL PROBABLY START CONSTRUCTION THIS SUMMER FOR A GROCER. GROCERY STORE THAT YOU SEE IN THE SITE PLAN. COUPLE OF OUT PARCEL. THEY WILL BE WHAT YOU FIND IN AN INTERCHANGE. DRIVE-THRU COFFEE, RESTAURANT, PROBABLY DRIVE-THRU.

BANK, GAS STATION THAT SERVES THE TRAVELING PUBLIC. I'LL TELL YOU, 18.75 ACRES GOES LIKE THIS. 18.75 ACRES TO GIVE YOU AN GOOD AFTERNOON, THE -- EXAMPLE, THE TARGET, JUST THE TARGET, 16.5 ACRES. JUST THAT TARGET.

WHAT WE FOUND IS THERE'S A GREAT DEMAND IN ALL OF LAKE ASBURY FOR MORE THAN JUST A GROCERY STORE AND A DRIVE-THRU COFFEE SHOP. THERE'S DEMAND FOR MEDICAL, FOR RESTAURANTS FOR THE HAIR DRESSER. THE LOCAL STUFF AND WE NOW HAVE HOUSES AND PEOPLE LIKE TO HAVE SOMETHING CLOSER TO HOME. WHILE WE SEE THAT THERE ARE OTHER VILLAGE CENTERS, THEY ARE QUITE BIT AWAY. THERE'S A DEMAND FOR EVERY SQUARE FOOT OF COMMERCIAL THAT YOU SEE ON THIS MAP. THE VILLAGE CENTER THAT WASN'T THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF VILLAGE PARK, IT WAS ACTUALLY MOVED DOWN TO SAND RIDGE. NOW THE CLOSEST COMMERCIAL THAT'S GOING TO BE UNDER THIS NEW STYLE DESIGN IN WE GOT IS ALL THE WAY DOWN ON SAND RIDGE.

BUT THERE'S NO INTERCHANGE THERE. THIS PARCEL IS INTENDED TO BALANCE A DEMAND FOR THE TRAVELING PUBLIC, WHICH IS GAS TAX, SALES TAX AND SERVICES FOR THE COUNTY. IT'S ALSO THE RESIDENCE IN THAT AREA ARE LOOKING FOR MORE THAN JUST A COFFEE SHOP. THIS PROPOSES TO CLARIFY THE BOUNDARY OF WHAT'S ALREADY THERE. SOUTH OF VERBENA AND EXPAND THE PARCEL TO THE NORTH.

AGAIN, THE PARCEL THAT'S SPOKEN FOR IS THE SITE PLAN THAT YOU SEE AND THE EXPANSION AREA IS TO THE EAST. IT IS NORTH OF VERBENA PARKWAY. WHEN VERBENA PARKWAY WAS FINALLY DESIGNED. IT WAS ONE OF THOSE LINES ON THE MAP.

IT HAD TO GET A FULL ENGINEERING DESIGN. YOU PUT A SPEED LIMIT ON IT.

[00:50:03]

THERE ARE RESIDENTIAL HOMES THAT YOU SEE ON THIS PLAN. THOSE HOMES ARE BUILT AND OCCUPIED. THERE WILL BE A LIGHT AT VERBENA PARKWAY THAT'S PART OF THE DESIGN PLANS AND THE OBLIGATION TO THE DEVELOPER. AGAIN, IF YOU LOOK AT THE 150 ACRES STATE ROUTE 16, YOU LOOK AT 75 ACRES ADDED A SAND RIDGE, YOU CAN SEE IT SCALE.

IT WAS NOT BIG ENOUGH TO SUPPORT THE DEMAND. THE AMENDMENT IS CLARIFY, INCREASE, THE CHANGE TO THE PERCENTAGES. THAT WAS A DISCUSSION OF THE CAC. WHEN WE STARTED, CLAY COUNTY HAS VILLAGE CENTERS AND INTERCHANGE VILLAGE CENTER IN LAKE ASBURY. EACH OF THOSE ARE MIXED USE CATEGORY.

EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM HAS COMMERCIAL, OFFICE, RESIDENTIAL CIVIC.

SOME OF THEM HAVE IT LIGHT INDUSTRIAL. THEY ARE INTENDED TO BE THIS MIX OF USES. YOU MIGHT HAVE TOWNHOUSES AND PEOPLE WILL BE ABLE TO WALK TO THE COFFEE SHOP. WHEN WE LOOKED AT THE EXPANSION OF THE ACREAGE, THAT NUMBER, WHICH IS SET AT 10% AND 50%, BECAME KIND OF HIGH. ALL WE'VE HEARD FROM EVERYBODY THERE'S PLENTY OF RESIDENCE IN THIS AREA. IN DISCUSSION WITH THE CAC AND DISCUSSION WITH THE COMMUNITY AROUND US, YOU'RE CONSIDERING THIS EVENING TO SAY THAT THE MINIMUM PERCENTAGE OF RESIDENTIAL IS ZERO. WE DON'T HAVE TO DO ANY.

I DON'T THINK THAT WILL MAKE EVENT UNHAPPY. IT ALSO SAYS THERE IS AN EDGE OR AS IT TRANSITIONS TO THE FRINGE ON THE EAST. MAYBE THOSE ARE TOWNHOUSES.

THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY AND IF THE DESIGN SUPPORTS IT AND WE TRYING TO CREATE FOR RESIDENTIAL TO BE BETTER MIXED, YOU CAN HAVE UP TO 30%. YOU DON'T HAVE TO HAVE ANY.

THAT'S THE PERCENTAGE THAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT RIGHT NOW. I THINK THAT THE PERCENTAGES ARE ARE THE CHANGE. LIGHT INDUSTRIAL NEVER BEEN ALLOWED IN AREA.

AROUND LAKE ASBURY WE HAVE LIGHTING STANDARD AND THEY WILL ALL APPLY.

WE HOPE IT WILL BE A REALLY NICE CENTER FOR PEOPLE TO FIND SOME SERVICES.

I WILL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> WHAT IS THAT PARCEL THAT'S ON THE UPPER LEFT CORNER? IS THAT A RETENTION POND? IS THERE SOMETHING ON THERE?

>> UPPER LEFT. THAT'S THE D.O.T. POND. THAT'S ALL D.O.T.'S POND.

>> EVERYTHING SO SMALL AND SOME OF THESE MAPS. IT'S HARD TO TELL WHAT IT IS.

>> YOU'RE GOING TO COME OFF THAT RAMP. >> SO THAT'S D.O.T.

THERE'S NOTHING EVER GOING TON THAT PARCEL? >> CORRECT.

>> ANY QUESTIONS FROM STAFF? BLACK SAND DEVELOPMENT. TWO DIFFERENT COMPANIES WITH THE SAME GENERAL MAKE-UP.

I WANT TO THANK COMMISSION FOR HEARING OUR APPLICATION. I WANT TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS IF YOU HAD ANY MORE QUESTION ABOUT THOUGHTS WHERE WE THINK WE'LL GET WITH THAT PIECE OF PROPERTY. WE WILL BE STARTING CONSTRUCTION ON THE ROAD THIS SUMMER.

THAT WILL CARRY ALL THE WAY THROUGH EVENTUALLY TO SAND RIDGE AND WE HAVE MET WITH SOME REPRESENTATIVES NEXT DOOR TO GET THEIR INPUT. THEY HAD SOME ADDITIONAL THOUGHTS ON THE RESIDENTIAL. THEY LIKE IT TO BE CLOSER TO ZERO THAN 30.

NOT SURE WHAT YOU CAN DO WITHIN THE CODE. WE'RE FINE WITH ZERO.

AGAIN, PROBABLY GOOD POINT TO DISCUSS WHAT'S APPROPRIATE AMOUNT OF RESIDENTIAL.

WHAT CAN YOU DO WITHIN THE CODE AND COMP PLAN. YOU'LL HEAR FROM THEM.

WE HAD A LOT OF DISCUSSIONS WITH THE RESIDENCE AND LOOK FORWARD TO YOUR INPUT ON THAT AS WELL.

[00:55:05]

>> YOU MENTIONED THE RESIDENCE, DIDN'T LIKE THE 30%. I'LL ASK THEM.

WAS IT CLEAR THAT ZERO IS WHAT YOU COMMITTING TO. THE 30 IS JUST IF YOU THINK

THERE'S A DEMAND FOR IT? >> RIGHT. THEY HAVE DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVE

PEOPLE THAT LIVE THERE NEXT DOOR. >> YOUR COMPANY IS BUILDING

VERBENA? >> THE PLANS ARE APPROVED. THE SIGNAL PLANS JUST GOTTEN APPROVED AND COMPLETED. FINAL BID SHOULD BE DONE THIS WEEK.

>> IT'S GOING TO BE A SIGNAL AT HENLEY? >> YES.

THAT'S ALL APPROVED THROUGH COUNTY AND CLAY ELECTRIC. >> ARE THERE ANY IMPROVEMENTS ON

HENLEY THAT ARE REQUIRED? >> AT THIS TIME, -- MAYBE SOME RESTRIPING OF THE MIDDLE LANE TO ALLOW FOR THE TURNING MOVEMENTS AND STUFF LIKE THAT. IT'S NOT PART OF THIS APPLICATION. THERE WILL BE DRIVEWAY ON HENLEY TWO DRIVEWAYS ON HENLEY WILL BE DIRECTIONAL AND VERBENA WILL BE THE REMAINING --

>> I KNOW IT'S FIVE LANES. I WAS WONDERING IF YOU'RE GOING NORTH ON HENLEY IF YOU'RE GOING

TO ADD A RIGHT TURN. >> YES. >> WITH THE PROPOSED ROAD THAT YOU PLAN TO PUT IN, LOOKS LIKE IT'S GOING TO BE GOING RIGHT BEHIND THE ENTIRE ROW OF HOUSES.

WHAT'S YOUR SETBACK FOR THAT? >> WE HAD TO READJUST. WE WERE PLODDING THE ROAD.

THE BIG SWEPTING CURVE THERE WASN'T AS BIG AS IT NEEDED TO BE.

WE REDESIGNED IT. WHICH PUSHED THAT NORTH. WE APPROVED SUBDIVISION PLAN.

HAD THAT ROAD RIGHT ON THE BACK OF THE LOT. WHAT WE'VE DONE, IT WORKS FOR EVERYBODY, BY MOVING THAT ROAD OUT. RIGHT THERE BEHIND THE LOT.

I THINK IT'S A MINIMUM OF 50 FEET. AVERAGE ABOUT 65 TO 70 FEET.

>> ASIDE FOR FROM THE VEGETATION IS THERE ANY OTHER BUFFER OR WALL OR FENCE?

>> JUST -- LEAVING THE EXISTING VENALVENAL -- VEGETATION AS MUCS WE CAN.

>> THOSE LOTS ALREADY FENCED UNDER THE CURRENT CODE WHEN THEY WERE BUILT?

>> YOU TALKING ABOUT THE PROPERTY OWNER FENCE'S? >> CORRECT.

THERE WILL BE A 50-FOOT BUFFER BEHIND THEM.

>> THANKS, APPRECIATE IT. I HAVE TWO CARDS ON THIS ONE. WE'LL OPEN PUBLIC HEARING.

MR. GARY SHIFT. >> I LIVE IN VILLAGE PARK. WHICH IS RIGHT THERE.

THANK YOU, COMMISSIONERS, FOR ALLOWING US TO SPEAK. WE HAVE TWO CONCERNS AS TO HOMEOWNERS. I SPEAK TODAY WITH TWO HATS. I'M A HOMEOWNER.

PROBABLY THE CLOSEST HOUSE TO PUBLIX. I SHOULDN'T SAID PUBLIX.

A GROCERY STORE. I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO APPLYING AS A BAD BOY.

NEVERTHELESS, OUR CONCERN STARTS WITH THE HALF-MOON CIRCLE. WHICH IS REALLY ALMOST A PART OF THE EXISTING VILLAGE PARK COMMUNITY. ACTUALLY, THE ROAD CONNECTS TO THAT CIRCLE FROM CROCUS WHICH IS WHERE THOSE HOMES ARE. WE'RE REQUESTING THAT THAT HALF-MOON SEEING THAT WE'RE ADDING RURAL FRINGE TO THE IBC, THAT WE TAKE THAT HALF-MOON AND REZONE THAT RURAL FRINGE BECAUSE WE DON'T WANT COMMERCIAL RETAIL IN THAT HALF-MOON SECTION.

[01:00:07]

PLEASE GIVE THAT CONSIDERATION. SECONDLY, CONCERNING THE EXTENSION FROM 18.5 ACRES TO 52 ACRES, WE WOULD PREFER, AS KIND OF WAS DISCUSSED, THAT THE RESIDENTIAL PORTION BE THE MAXIMUM BE REDUCED TO ZERO. THIS WHOLE AREA INCLUDING THE NEW DEVELOPMENT ACROSS HENLEY, THEY'RE ALL SINGLE FAMILY HOMES. WE HAVE A ZERO MINIMUM REQUIREMENT BUT AT 30%, WHICH IS REDUCED FROM 50%. THAT STILL GIVE THE DEVELOPER THE OPPORTUNITY TO ADD 15 ACRES AT A MAXIMUM 16 UNITS PER ACRE WHICH IS QUITE SIGNIFICANT. WE WOULD REALLY REQUEST THE RESIDENTIAL PART BE PULLED OUT SEEING THAT WE'RE IN THE PROCESS OF MAKING ADJUSTMENTS ANYWAYS.

THEN THIRDLY, CONCERNING THE BUFFER THAT WAS DISCUSSED ALONG WHERE THOSE HOMES ARE.

WE TALKED TO THE DEVELOPER. HE SEEMS VERY COMPLIANT GIVING US A NICE BUFFER.

WE'RE CONCERNED ABOUT THE ADDITIONAL LIGHTING, TRAFFIC NOISE THAT THIS ADDITIONAL 52 ACRES WILL IMPACT OUR COMMUNITY. MOST IMPORTANTLY THAT HALF-MOON.

WE REALLY FEEL THAT SHOULD BE RURAL FRINGE. I THANK YOU FOR THAT

CONSIDERATION. THANK YOU. >> MY NEXT CARD IS TOMMY

CHILDRESS. >> 3453 VILLAGE PARK. SAME NEIGHBORHOOD AS GARY.

I'M ACTUAL HOA PRESIDENT CURRENTLY. THANK YOU GUYS FOR ALL YOUR TIME TO HEAR US OUT. THIS IS ALL BEEN A WHIRLWIND OF DEVELOPMENTS WHEN WE MOVED IN.

WE HAVE ABOUT 156 HOMES WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT. WE KNEW IT WILL BE EXPANDING.

WE KNEW IT -- PART OF THAT HALF-MOON THERE, IT IS ALREADY DEVELOPED TO HAVE ADDITIONAL HOMES THAT THE PLUMBING, WATER, SEWER AND EVERYTHING IS ALREADY THERE.

BY DOING WHAT CARE GARY SAID, CHANGING THAT TO SINGLE FAMILY HOMES WHERE THERE'S BUSINESSES CAN GO IN THERE. I THINK IS THE RIGHT MOVE FOR THAT SINCE THE DEVELOPMENT HAS BEEN DEVELOPED FOR THAT AND KEEPING THAT. THAT DOESN'T IMPEDE ANYTHING ON THE 52 ACRES OR ACREAGE ABOVE IT WHAT THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT DOING.

I THINK IT'S A GREAT ADDITION. ONE THING THAT'S NOT HIGHLIGHTED HERE, GARY BRIEFLY MENTIONED IT, THERE'S RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET ON HENLEY THERE'S NEW DEVELOPMENT IN LAKE ASBURY WITH PROBABLY A COUPLE OF HUNDRED HOMES. I'M NOT SURE OF THE NUMBER.

JUST SOUTH OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, IS HIGHLAND PARK. THAT A HUGE NEIGHBORHOOD.

1500 PLUS HOMES. A LOT OF THINGS. S GOING TO BE GREAT ADDITION.

WE DON'T WANT THE MAXIMUM HE HAD MENTIONED TO BE THAT PERCENTAGE. WE WANT THAT CHANCE FOR IT APARTMENTS OR TOWNHOMES OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, EVEN FUTURE DEVELOPMENT.

WE WANT IT TO BE ZERO. WE WANT TO BE GUARANTEED THAT THE SINGLE HOME FAMILY HOME DEVELOPMENT THAT WE MOVED INTO STAYS THAT WAY TO MATCH THE ENTIRE AREA LITERALLY FROM ONE END HENLEY TO THE NEXT. WE'RE ALL IN SUPPORT OF HAVING THE ADDITIONAL RESTAURANTS.

THAT'S THE THING WE DON'T HAVE OUT IN THAT AREA. WE DON'T -- WE WOULD LOVE TO SEE. WE WOULD LOVE TO SOW SOME SITDOWN RESTAURANTS.

HAVING THAT CHANCE THAT OTHER TYPE OF HOUSING COULD GO IN THERE WOULD DIMINISH AND TAKE AWAY FROM WHAT COULD POTENTIALLY GO IN THERE -- POSSIBLY GO IN THERE.

THAT'S REALLY ALL I HAD. I WANT TO THANK YOU GUYS FOR YOUR TIME AND CONSIDERATION.

>> I DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER CARDS. IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE? DID YOU TAKE THE OATH?

>> YES. MY ADDRESS IS ON FILE. I ALSO --

[01:05:05]

>> STATE IT FOR THE RECORD? >> I REPRESENT THE CHAIR FOR THE CITIZEN LAKE ASBURY CITIZEN ADVISORY COMMITTEE. I AM THE ONE THAT VOTED AGAINST THIS ONE.

THERE'S COUPLE OF THINGS THAT GOING ON AS WE LOOK AT THIS. MY REASON FOR VOTING NO WAS BECAUSE OF THE VERBIAGE OF CHANGING THE VILLAGE CENTER AND HAVING EVERYTHING NOT BEING THE SAME AS THE OTHER INTERCHANGE VILLAGE CENTER. WE HAVE COME BEFORE YOU WITH A DIFFERENT ONE TO MAKE THE VERBIAGE THE SAME. AS WE STAND THERE SAYING, WE WANT TO HAVE THE MATCHING, NOW WE'RE TAKING IT AWAY. ONE OF THE COMMENTS THAT WAS MADE ON THAT HALF-MOON SECTION WAS 5% AND THEY JUST KIND OF SAID THAT'S WHAT FITS IN THAT AREA AND KEEPING THAT PART RESIDENTIAL. IN MY OPINION, THE RESIDENCE AND OUR COUNTY THAT KEEPS SAYING WE'RE TIRED OF DEVELOPERS COMING IN AND MAKING IT FIT THEIR MOLD VERSUS WHAT IS POSED TO BE OUT THERE. FELL IN THAT SAME LINE OF REASONING ON THAT. IT'S JUST A HARD ONE FOR ME TO SUPPORT.

I SUPPORT THE VERBIAGES ALL BEING THE SAME. ONE OF THE QUESTIONS THAT I DON'T QUITE UNDERSTAND IS WHEN IT CAME BEFORE THE CITIZENS ADVISORY, IT HAD THE VERBIAGE FOR 5%. NOW IT'S BEING MOVED TO ZERO. I DON'T KNOW WHY IT DOESN'T STAY THE SAME WHAT WAS PRESENTED TO THE LAKE ASBURY CITIZENS ADVISORY.

THIS IS THE SECOND TIME ON THE ADVISORY THAT I'VE SEEN A PROJECT COME BEFORE US LOOK ONE WAY AND THEN COME BEFORE THE OTHER ONE WAS THE COUNTY COMMISSIONER, LOOK A DIFFERENT WAY. I DON'T KNOW WHY THAT HAPPENS. I WOULD LOVE HELP TO UNDERSTAND THAT A LITTLE BIT. THE OTHER PROJECT WAS THE SARASOTA SPRINGS DEVELOPMENT AND ONE OF THE LITTLE SUBSECTIONS THAT WAS SAGE BROOK THAT WASN'T INCLUDED BUT CAME BEFORE THE COUNTY AND MAPPED OUT. I DON'T KNOW WHERE YOU GO FROM THIS ONE.

I DO THE NOT HAVING ANY OF THE RESIDENTIAL IN THE INTERCHANGE VILLAGE CENTER.

IF IT WAS REMOVED IN ALL OF THEM, ZERO, BECAUSE IT'S THE INTERCHANGE, BUT THAT AREA ON THAT HALF-MOON, LIKE THE RESIDENTS WERE SAYING, THAT'S WHERE THEY WERE GOING TO PUT THE 5% OF RESIDENTIAL, THE MULTIFAMILY. I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU MAKE EVERYBODY HAPPY. YET, STILL KEEP IT ALL MOVING FORWARD.

I LIVE OUT THERE TOO. WE ARE ALL IN NEED OF THE RESTAURANTS AND THE DIFFERENT EXPANSION. I KNOW ORIGINALLY THAT WAS PART OF ANOTHER COMMUNITY MASTER PLAN. I DID HAVE QUESTIONS ON THE PARK AND DIFFERENT THINGS THAT WERE LINED UP WITH THAT. MAKING SURE THAT WE KEEL ALL --P ALL THOSE THINGS IN MIND.

THANK YOU AGAIN. GREATLY APPRECIATE. >> THANK YOU.

ANYBODY ELSE FROM THE PUBLIC? I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. I WILL BRING IT BACK.

MS. FRASER. >> I WANT TO CLEAR UP CONFUSION. WHILE WE'RE SHOWING YOU HERE THE SITE PLAN THAT IS APPROVED FOR THE NOW RESIDENTIAL. THERE'S AN APPROVED SITE PLAN SOUTH OF VERBENA PARKWAY FOR TOWNHOUSES. WHEN WE CONTEMPLATED THIS BECOME EXPANDED, IT WAS WOULD THEY STAY TOWNHOUSE OR MOVE SOMEWHERE ELSE.

THAT'S WHY THERE'S WATER AND SEWER PIPE TO THIS PARTICULAR PART OF THE PROPERTY.

IT WAS A REQUIREMENT FOR THE 18.75 ACRES OF IDC. THEY HAVE MINIMUM 10% RESIDENTIAL IN THE CODE TODAY. THERE WAS ABOUT THREE ACRES OF TOWNHOUSES THAT WERE THERE.

THAT TYPE OF SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED DWELLING IS WHAT SUPPORTED IN IBC AS A TRANSITION BETWEEN SOME SHOPPING AND SINGLE FAMILY HOMES. AT THE CAC, WHILE THE CHAIR HAD A DISCUSSION ABOUT KEEPING THE RESIDENTIAL THE SAME AS IT IS IN THE IBC FOR THE ONE AT 16, THERE'S ONLY TWO ONE. THAT WAS MUCH BIGGER. THE REST OF THE CAC WANTED IT TO GO TO ZERO. WE HAD PROPOSED 5%. THERE WAS A GREAT DEAL OF DISCUSSION. THEY TOO SAID WE THINK THE MINIMUM SHOULD BE ZERO.

[01:10:02]

THAT'S WHY YOU SAW IT GO FROM 5% THAT WAS PRESENTED BOTH IN ORIGINAL APPLICATION AND TO THE CAC. THEIR DISCUSSION TOOK IT IN THE ZERO PERCENT CONVERSATION.

THE STAFF SUPPORTED THAT AND THE COMMUNITY SUPPORTED THAT. THAT'S WHY WE'RE ASKING YOU TO CONSIDER NOT HAVING REQUIREMENT RESIDENTIAL. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS I'M

HAPPY TO ANSWER. >> AGAIN, TOM YOUNG I WANTED TO FOLLOW UP ON THE SEMICIRCLE SOUTH OF VERBENA. WITHIN THE ABILITY OF THE COUNTY TO DO THIS, WE'RE HAPPY TO DO SINGLE FAMILY. IT'S NOT REALLY SOMETHING WE FEEL -- I THINK IT'S TRICKY ADMINISTRATIVELY HOW THE CODE IS WRITTEN AND ALL THAT KIND OF STUFF HOW TO MAKE THAT HAPPEN. CONCEPTIONALLY, WE DON'T HAVE AN ISSUE WHAT THE RESIDENTS ARE

PROPOSING. >> I'M STILL LITTLE UP CLEAR AFTER HEARING ALL THIS.

WAS THERE AT SOME POINT A PLAN TO BUILD LIKE TOWNHOMES ON THAT SEMICIRCLE?

>> IT WAS APPROVED CONCEPT PLAN THAT WENT TO DRC SEVERAL YEARS AGO.

IT HAD TEN DUPLEX LOTS. THAT WAS WELL BEFORE THIS EXPANSION WAS CONTEMPLATED.

>> IT WASN'T SINGLE FAMILY. IT WAS TOWNHOMES? >> YES.

DUPLEXES. >> NOT SURE THE DIFFERENCE IN THAT.

>> IBC DOESN'T ALLOW SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED. >> THEY ARE DUPLEXES?

>> YES. >> SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED ARE PROVIDED.

THAT'S DUPLEXES AND TOWNHOUSES, QUADS. >> THE WAY THIS IS WRITTEN, YOU GUYS HAVE THE OPTION TO BUILD THAT IF YOU WANT. WHICH ALSO HAVE ARE THE OPTION

NOT TO BUILD IT. >> RIGHT. THERE'S A REQUIREMENT WITHIN IBC

CURRENTLY TO BUILD SOME RESIDENTIAL. >> I'M LOOKING AT WHERE WE'RE GOING WITH THIS. THERE WOULDN'T BE ANYTHING AS LONG AS WE LEFT IT 30% FOR THE MAX. YOU'D STILL BE ABLE TO BUILD THAT SHOULD THERE BE A PRODUCT.

I'LL TELL YOU WHAT I'M THINKING HERE. IT'S MULTIFAMILY BASICALLY.

I'M ALWAYS THINKING OF WAYS WE CAN GET SOME LITTLE BIT MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN HERE.

IT SEEMS TO ME WHEN YOU TO DO ATTACHED, THOSE USUALLY ARE LITTLE BIT LESS.

HOW MUCH OF THAT AREA THAT SEMICIRCLE IS UNDER THE OLD CONCEPT TO HAVE THE DUPLEXS?

>> ABOUT TWO AND A HALF ACRES. >> HOW MUCH IS THAT SEMICIRCLE ALL TOGETHER? INCLUDING THE POND AND STUFF, ABOUT EIGHT ACRES. INCLUDING ALL THE PONDS.

>> CLEAR ENOUGH FOR ME. I'M GOOD. THANK YOU.

>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> WHERE IS VERBENA PARKWAY

GOING TO CONNECT TO ON THE SOUTHEAST SIDE? >> SAND RIDGE.

HIGHLY TRAIL DEVELOPMENT ALREADY BUILT. >> IT'S GOING TO GO THROUGH THE

DEVELOPMENTS THAT ARE BEING DEVELOPED WITHIN THERE AS WELL? >> SEE THE BLACK LINE?

PLEASE. >> THAT'S THE BYPASS FROM THE SCHOOLS AND ALL THE THINGS THAT

[01:15:03]

ARE GOING ON. >> SUSAN, ANOTHER QUESTION. YOU HAD MENTIONED ABOUT MULTIUNIT BEING BUILT SOUTH OF THIS PARTICULAR DEVELOPMENT THAT IS THERE.

IS THAT MULTIUNIT GOING TO BE PART OF WHAT'S IN OR IS IT GOING TO BE PART OF WHAT WOULD BE ACTUALLY ON HENLEY? WITH DEVELOPMENTS GOING THERE NOW.

IS THE MULTIUNIT INSIDE OR IS IT GOING TO BE SOMEWHERE WHERE IT'S VISIBLE ON HENLEY?

>> THE PLAN -- IT'S A CONCEPT PLAN. IT'S THREE ACRES DUE SOUTH IN

THAT SEMICIRCLE. YOU GOT A POND AT HENLEY. >> I'M FAMILIAR WITH THIS

DEVELOPMENT. >> THE WETLANDS AND THEN IT'S THE NEXT PIECE.

IT WOULD BE OFF VERBENA PARKWAY ONLY. >> OKAY.

MY QUESTION TO YOU IS IS GOING TO BE WHERE IF YOU DRIVING DOWN HENLEY PEOPLE WILL SEE MULTIUNIT. RIGHT NOW, IT'S ALL SINGLE FAMILY.

THE WHOLE AREA. EXCEPT FOR SOME OF THE BUSINESSES.

IT'S A REALLY PRETTY ROAD. IT'S A GREAT AREA DOWN THERE. I WOULDN'T WANT TO SEE IT BECOME SOMETHING WHERE WE'RE PUTTING IN HOUSING THAT DOESN'T CONFORM TO THAT PARTICULAR AREA RIGHT NOW.

THAT'S MY QUESTION. >> JUST TO MAKE SURE WE'RE SAYING THE SAME THING.

SEE THERE'S INTERSECTION AT VERBENA AND THE SIGNAL. THERE'S A WETLAND AND THERE'S A POND. THAT POND GETS BIGGER AND THEN THIS IS WHERE -- IF THEY WERE

BUILT, THAT'S WHERE THEY WOULD BE. >> RESIDENTIAL.

THAT WOULD BE DUPLEXES THAT WE WERE JUST DISCUSSING? POSSIBLY.

I'M JUST TRYING TO G CLARIFICATION. >> THAT W BECOME ANOTHER CHANGE THAT WE WILL HAVE TO HEAR. I'M JUST TRYING TO KEEP CONTINUITY IN THAT PARTICULAR AREA, TRUTHFULLY. I DON'T WANT TO SEE IT BECOME SOMETHING -- I WOULDN'T WANT IT

TO SEE IT BECOME SOMETHING THAT WILL LOOK TOO COMMERCIAL. >> THIS IS THE FIRST ONE OF THESE IBCS. THIS OUR CHANCE TO DO IT RIGHT THE FIRST TIME.

I AGREE WITH YOU. >> THANK YOU. >> ALL RIGHT.

DISCUSSION? >> I'M GOING TO RESPOND TO JOE FOR A MINUTE.

I AM ACTUALLY THE OPPOSITE OF YOU ON THIS. I LIKE THE IDEA OF MIXED HOUSING. I THINK IT'S THE BEST WAY TO GO. I THINK WHEN IT'S ALL SINGLE FAMILY. I'M OKAY WITH THIS. LET'S STAY ON THIS PLAN.

I LIKE -- I THINK THE WAY THIS IS WRITTEN, IT GIVES CELEBRITY TO DO OR NOT DO WHATEVER THE THERE'S STANDARDS IN ALL OF LAKE ASBURY THAT ARE GOING TO ENSURE THIS GETS DONE CORRECTLY.

NOT SPECIFIC TO THIS ONE BUT ONE CAUTION I WANT TO THROW OUT THERE KIND OF GOING FORWARD.

IS THE WHOLE IDEA BEHIND THE LAKE ASBURY MASTER PLAN WAS TO STOP HENLEY ROAD FROM TURNING INTO ANOTHER BLANDING OR 218. WE CANNOT CONTINUE TO ADD THESE COMMERCIAL CHUNKS OF LAND ALL THE WAY DOWN HENLEY. THERE HAS TO BE A POINT WHERE IT STOPS.

THIS ONE SITS RIGHT NEXT TO THE EXPRESSWAY. THE RESIDENCE SEEMS SUPPORTIVE OF IT. WHICH FLIPS MY VOTE TO A YES FOR THIS.

AT SOME POINT, IT'S GOING -- WE HAVE TO SAY ENOUGH IS ENOUGH ON HENLEY.

>> MY ONLY CONCERN IS REALLY AS THIS PROGRESSES, IS SEEING THREE STORY AND FOUR-STORY APARTMENT BUILDINGS IN THIS PARTICULAR AREA. WHICH I JUST DON'T THINK WOULD KIND OF FIT THAT MODEL FOR THAT PARTICULAR STRETCH OF ROADWAY. I'M OKAY WITH TOWNHOUSES.

I'M OKAY WITH ANYTHING LIKE THAT. WHEN YOU START TO DEVELOP THEE MULTIUNIT PROPERTIES WHERE WILL HAVE SEVERAL FLOORS NOW YOU'RE CUTTING VISIBILITY FROM SOME OF THE PEOPLE WHO ALREADY BEEN THERE FOR A LONG TIME. THOSE ARE THE KIND OF THINGS I WOULD BE UPSET WITH IF I WAS A HOMEOWNER THERE. I'M NOT AGAINST THIS.

I'M JUST TRYING TO PUT SOME FUEL OUT THERE FOR PEOPLE TO THINK AND THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS AS

THESE THINGS START TO COMPLETELY CHANGE THIS PARTICULAR AREA. >> IF I COULD, JOE.

THE THREE ACRES SIZE. APARTMENTS APARTMENTS. MULTIFAMILY.

[01:20:03]

I THINK HERE I WANT YOU TO HAVE THE PICTURE IN YOUR HEAD THAT IT WOULD BE MOST TWO-STORY

TOWNHOUSES. >> I'M FINE WITH THAT. IT'S THE OTHER STUFF THAT I'M

KIND OF OBJECTING TO. >> MY COMMENTS REAL QUICK. I THINK THE RESIDENCE KIND OF CLEAR THEY DON'T WANT TO SEE ANY MORE RESIDENTIAL. THEY DO WANT MORE COMMERCIAL AND THAT SORT OF STUFF. THE WHOLE POINT OF VILLAGE CENTER WAS TO CENTRALIZE THE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT. THAT'S WHERE IT STOPS SPECIFIC POINTS AND TO COMMISSIONER PUCKHABER'S POINT THIS IS TO ELIMINATE OR PREVENT COMMERCIAL CRAWLING UP AND DOWN HENLEY ROAD AND ALL THE OTHER ROADS OUT THERE. HOPEFULLY, THIS WILL HOLE TO IT.

A DEVELOPER WOULD AT LEAST PAY ATTENTION TO THE DESIRES OF THE COMMUNITY THAT'S ALREADY OUT THERE IN ORDER TO PRESERVE THEIR CURRENT NEIGHBORHOOD THAT THEY OWN AND LIVE IN.

I THINK THAT WILL BE MAJOR UP CHECK FOR YOU. I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION.

>> MR. CHAIR, I'LL MOVE THE STAFF REPORT. THIS IS TWO VOTES.

ON THE COMP PLAN. >> I'LL SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND.

ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. >> AYE.

>> SAME SIGN. >> MR. CHAIR, I'LL MOVE THE ZONING REQUEST MOVE THE STAFF

REPORT AS WELL. >> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

>> AYE. >> OPPOSED, SAME SIGN. OKAY, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

WE APPRECIATE YOUR TIME. I WILL OPEN THE LAND PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD.

ANYBODY WANT TO SAY ANYTHING ABOUT ANYTHING THAT'S NOT ON THE AGENDA BUT PERTAINS TO THIS COMMISSION? SEEING NONE. I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

[Old Business/New Business]

NEXT MEETING IS MARCH 3RD -- >> MR. CHAIRMAN. I GOT SOMETHING I WANT TO BRING UP UNDER NEW BUSINESS. I WANT TO BRING THIS UP FOR THOUGHT AND DISCUSSION REAL QUICK. IN ALL OF THESE REPORTS, THERE'S THE CRITERIA ABOUT IS IT SMALL, IS IT COMPATIBLE. I'VE SAID THIS IN OTHER MEETINGS BEFORE WHEN WE SEE THE STAFF RESPOND TO THAT, THOSE ARE SUBJECTIVE COMMENTS. I MIGHT LOOK AT IT AND HAVE OPPOSITE VIEW. SOME JURISDICTION AROUND HERE, I THINK IT'S ST. JOHNS COUNTY, DID THEIR PLANNING COMMISSION WHEN THEY ANSWERED THOSE QUESTIONS. THEY PROVIDE BOTH WHAT SUPPORTS IT AND WHAT DOESN'T SUPPORT IT. I THINK IT'S ST. JOHNS COUNTY. THAT GIVES US THE OPTION -- I THINK THERE'S BEEN KIND OF PERCEPTION THAT IF STAFF SUBJECTIVELY ANSWERS YES, QUESTIONS WE GOT TO LET IT GO THROUGH. MY ANSWERS MAY NOT BE THE SAME AS STAFF.

THEY ARE NOT 100% OBJECTIVE ANSWERS. I WANT TO BRING THAT UP JUST FOR THOUGHT THAT MAY BE WE LOOK AT SOMETHING ALONG THOSE LINES GOING IN THE FUTURE SOMEWHERE.

WE'RE ALWAYS FREE TO DISAGREE WITH STAFF. WHEN WE DO, WE GOT TO SAY WHY.

WHICH I TRY TO DO. IT DOES STAY IN THE STAFF REPORT AS THAT WAS THEIR OPINION OF IT.

I THINK STAFF IS RIGHT ABOUT 95% OF THE TIME. THERE ARE THOSE TIMES I WILL DISAGREE WITH THEM. I WANT TO PUT THAT OUT THERE AS LITTLE BIT OF THOUGHT.

THAT'S ALL.

[01:25:07]